Monday, February 04, 2013

Gun Regulations, Malloy’s Position Via Lawlor

Michael Lawlor,
Governor Dannel Malloy’s Undersecretary of Criminal Justice for Connecticut and
the architect of the state’s troubled early release Earned Risk Reduction Credits program,
has given us a peek into Mr. Malloy’s views on pending legislation affecting
gun control.

According to Mr.
Lawlor, a number of areas need to be addressed by the legislature. They include:

1) Requiring some
or all "long guns," such as rifles and shotguns, to have the same
regulations on sales and transfers as handguns. Under existing state law, the
assault rifle used in the Newtown massacre can be sold from one neighbor to
another with no questions asked, Lawlor said.

This is a measure
that had been adopted voluntarily, without benefit of legislation, by Hoffman’s
Gun Center – “Guns for the Good Guys” – prior to its recommendation by Mr.
Lawlor.

2) Better
defining an assault weapon so manufacturers can't slightly modify a weapon to
render it outside the definition.

Good luck with
the definition. Connecticut law already prohibits the sale and transfer of
assault weapons, which are described in prohibitive statutes as “firearms
capable of fully automatic, semiautomatic or burst fire at the option of the
user.”

Adding yet another long gun to the list would be like dropping holy water into Hell; it would affect criminal gun violence not at all. Chicago has the most restrictive gun laws in the nation -- and the most violent assaults with weapons.

3) Focusing on
behavior instead of a diagnosis from a mental health professional in
determining who is disqualified from having a permit to own a gun. "Gov.
Malloy is very concerned about unnecessary stigmatization about people with
mental illness. There are plenty of people who are dangerous who are not
mentally ill," Lawlor said.

Some consider it
a pity and a lapse of judgmentthat neither the governor nor Mr. Lawlor are
willing to apply the same test to lawful gun owners.

4) Whether a gun
owner has to notify authorities if he or she lives with someone who exhibits
troubling behavior.

“Troubling
behavior” is a term of art. Would membership in the Goth Club of the local high
school qualify as “troubling behavior?” What about non-members of the NRA who, in concert with
the U.S. Supreme Court, assert that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
provides an individual right of self-protection? Would such claims
qualify as "troubling" or aberrant behavior?

5) Modifying a
gun seizure law in Connecticut that allows police to seize weapons from a
person at imminent risk to himself or others. Lawlor said the judicial branch
has said the guns can be withheld for a year and he suggested the seizure could
be permanent.

The gun seizure
law should be permanently applied only if the imminent risk to oneself or
others is permanent.

6) Restricting
the purchase of ammunition to people with gun permits, which Lisa Labella, co-executive director of Connecticut Against Gun
Violence and a speaker at the forum, said would make illegally-owned guns
"useless."

It may just as
easily create a black market in illegal ammunition sales that would make it
less possible to trace a bullet used in a crime to a purchaser.

7) Restricting
gun permits to people who have been convicted of more than just felonies and
major misdemeanors. He noted drunken driving was not on the list.

Would the restriction
have prevented Frankie “The Razor” Resto from acquiring the weapon he used to
murder Ibraham Ghazal,
the owner of an EZMart in Meriden, after Mr.
Resto had been released early under a program designed by Mr. Lawlor? Doubtful.